Implement analyzer for secrets

[manumafe98]

closes #112

Todo:

• Add website-copy comments
• Merge Adding analyzer comments for Secrets website-copy#2330

[ErikSchierboom]

Approving via hand waving :) Someone else should do the actual Java code review :)

[sanderploegsma]

I found another case that we may be able to comment on:

public class Secrets {
    public static int shiftBack(int value, int amount) {
        if (value<0) return value>>>amount;
        return value>>amount;
    }
}

Perhaps we can add an actionable comment on this, saying that using >>> works for both positive and negative values and no if-statement is required.

[manumafe98]

I found another case that we may be able to comment on:

public class Secrets {
    public static int shiftBack(int value, int amount) {
        if (value<0) return value>>>amount;
        return value>>amount;
    }
}

Perhaps we can add an actionable comment on this, saying that using >>> works for both positive and negative values and no if-statement is required.

Instead of being that specific I think I'm going to make a comment to avoid any conditional logic, so they focus only on using the correct operator

[manumafe98]

@sanderploegsma I should add extra smoke tests? or we should limit to create 2/3?

[sanderploegsma]

@sanderploegsma I should add extra smoke tests? or we should limit to create 2/3?

The current amount is fine. The primary goal of these tests is to test the analyzer end-to-end just to make sure we didn't make a mistake that would otherwise be missed because it's not covered by the JUnit tests.

Basically we want to see that the analyzer provides some output for each exercise. It's not needed to cover all scenarios this way, that's what the JUnit tests are for.

[sanderploegsma]

LGTM 👍